PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 1781468

Illumination and errors in dispensing.

Abstract

The relationship between the level of illumination and the prescription-dispensing error rate in a high-volume Army outpatient pharmacy was investigated. The prescription error rate was determined by direct, undisguised observation and retrospective prescription review under three levels of illumination (45, 102, and 146 foot-candles) during 21 consecutive weekdays. Illumination was controlled in the prescription-checking area of the pharmacy by using additional fluorescent lamps and filters. The three levels of illumination were randomly assigned to the 21 days to provide a total of 7 days of observations per level. The final sample consisted of 10,888 prescriptions dispensed by five pharmacists. The overall prescription error rate (including both content and labeling errors) was 3.39% (369 prescriptions). An illumination level of 146 foot-candles was associated with a significantly lower error rate (2.6%) than the baseline level of 45 foot-candles (3.8%). There was a linear relationship between each pharmacist's error rate and that pharmacist's corresponding daily prescription workload for all three illumination levels. The effect of the observer was minimal. The rate of prescription-dispensing errors was associated with the level of illumination. Ergonomics can affect the performance of professional tasks.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T L Buchanan, K N Barker, J T Gibson, B C Jiang, R E Pearson. 1991. Illumination and errors in dispensing.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1781468/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Neonatal examination and screening trial (NEST): a randomised, controlled, switchback trial of alternative policies for low risk infants.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of one rather than two hospital neonatal examinations in detection of abnormalities. DESIGN: Randomised controlled switchback trial. SETTING: Postnatal wards in a teaching hospital in north east Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: All infants delivered at the hospital between March 1993 and February 1995. INTERVENTION: A policy of one neonatal screening examination compared with a policy of two. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Congenital conditions diagnosed in hospital; results of community health assessments at 8 weeks and 8 months; outpatient referrals; inpatient admissions; use of general practioner services; focused analysis of outcomes for suspected hip and heart abnormalities. RESULTS: 4835 babies were allocated to receive one screening examination (one screen policy) and 4877 to receive two (two screen policy). More congenital conditions were suspected at discharge among babies examined twice (9.9 v 8.3 diagnoses per 100 babies; 95% confidence interval for difference 0.3 to 2.7). There was no overall significant difference between the groups in use of community, outpatient, or inpatient resources or in health care received. Although more babies who were examined twice attended orthopaedic outpatient clinics (340 (7%) v 289 (6%)), particularly for suspected congenital dislocation of the hip (176 (3.6/100 babies) v 137 (2.8/100 babies); difference -0.8; -1.5 to 0.1), there was no significant difference in the number of babies who required active management (12 (0.2%) v 15 (0.3%)). CONCLUSIONS: Despite more suspected abnormalities, there was no evidence of net health gain from a policy of two hospital neonatal examinations. Adoption of a single examination policy would save resources both during the postnatal hospital stay and through fewer outpatient consultations.

Ambulatory Care